NRA survey takes aim at sheriff's association

TALLAHASSEE — The National Rifle Association and Unified Sportsmen of Florida are surveying state sheriff candidates on whether they’re willing to take a stand against the very association that will represent them in the Capitol if they win.

Their survey sent to candidates takes aim at the Florida Sheriff’s Association and other law enforcement groups, sheriffs and deputies that have opposed bills the two groups support. It also seeks support on the two groups’ future legislative agenda, including defending the 2005 Florida “stand your ground” law that always people to use deadly force no matter where they are if they fear they are at risk of being killed or seriously injured.

The groups told candidates they will not endorse or support any candidate that doesn’t return the surveys. They also said that not answering questions on the survey would be counted as a response against gun rights.

“There are no trick questions,” said the survey, which was sent by Marion Hammer, executive director of the Unified Sportsmen of Florida.

But the sheriff’s association said the survey seems to be slanted against its organization and appears to be an attempt to take away the voices of some sheriffs and deputies during the legislative process.

“The sheriffs in our state have long defended a citizen’s right to keep and bear arms as outline in the Second Amendment of the Constitution,” the association said in an email to The Associated Press. “The sheriffs also have a duty to oppose legislation that would reduce public safety and place citizens and law enforcement officers at greater risk. It is unfortunate that some would view this common sense approach as being anti-Second Amendment as this is far from our position.”

And if the association feels targeted, that’s because it is.

Hammer said sheriffs are sworn to uphold the Constitution and testifying against pro-gun bills is a conflict.

“If the sheriffs association and urban sheriffs are going to start actively campaigning against Second Amendment rights, then we’re going to send out questionnaires that ask sheriffs where they stand on these issues,” Hammer said. She said while gun groups have sent legislative candidates surveys for years, this is the first time they’ve been sent to sheriff candidates. She said that’s because of the association’s increasing involvement on gun bills.

“In the old days we worked together with the sheriffs association,” Hammer said. “If a bill comes up that we’re interested in, they don’t call us and talk to us like they did in the good old days, they just get on a horse and ride down to the Capitol and testify against our legislation.”

The survey said there has been a growing practice of sheriffs and deputies traveling to Tallahassee “to lobby against Second Amendment issues and the rights of law-abiding gun owners.” It asks candidates if they would prohibit their deputies from testifying in uniform against bills the gun rights groups support. It also asks if they would stop their deputies or employees from lobbying against pro-gun bills in the name of their sheriff’s department or an organization or association that represents law enforcement.

If candidates don’t support the ban, they are asked to check a statement that says “I would allow it if it makes things more convenient for law enforcement.”

“Do you think that it is appropriate for the Florida Sheriffs Association or any sheriff to threaten legislators or to lobby against citizens on Second Amendment issues?” the survey asks.

Among legislative issues mentioned on the survey is the “stand your ground” law that some people want changed after neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman fatally shot Trayvon Martin. He claims self-defense.

It also asks about support for laws that would allow guns on college campuses and allow gun owners to openly carry their weapons.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

They would be the only ones with firearms ! They are increasingly violating the Constitution with abuses of no-knock warrants, often busting into the wrong addresses and shooting family pets for no reason other than they are there. They have become para-military units with all the same gear and vehicles. They always claim "officer safety" when they have the safest job in the world.

Who better to speak on the behalf of sheriffs and deputies than -- sheriffs and deputies?

Certainly not right wing groups like The National Rifle Association and Unified Sportsmen of Florida trying to diminish the voices of Sheriffs and Deputies and enhance their own.

Just what we need -- more special interests trying to insert themselves into the affairs of government. This really stinks! It reminds a lot of Grover Norquist and his anti-tax pledge -- he will speak for our elected representatives instead of our elected representatives speaking for themselves.

Maybe the best thing to do is vote AGAINST anybody who "takes a stand against the Florida Sherriff’s Association"! Seems like those who would do that are willing to render themselves and their organizations impotent and voiceless. This is partisan B/S that has no legitimate role in law enforcement. It's trying to turn law enforcement into political activists -- now that’s a really good idea. NOT!!!!

I usually agree with you but in my opinion you are way off base with your above post.

"They would be the only ones with firearms ! They are increasingly violating the Constitution.................."

No way! And even if you are correct there is a better approach to solving the problem. Certainly its not the way these two organizations are attempting -- in fact how would what they want to do solve ANYTHING you are asserting?

This appears to be a heavy-handed effort at extorting the Florida Sheriffs into giving up the right to think for themselves and to speak freely.
"Hammer said sheriffs are sworn to uphold the Constitution and testifying against pro-gun bills is a conflict." So, any and all pro-gun bills should be given free passage because any opposition is unConstitutional?
Isn't that why we have legislative bodies and courts to determine Constitutionality if the issue comes into question?
I had a co-worker, NRA to the core, who used to amuse us by arguing for the rights of grade-school kids to carry concealed weapons in school. He was also outraged by the fact that private citizens could not legally own nuclear weapons. He pointed out, correctly, that the Founding Fathers had not addressed nuclear arms.
But he was serious. A total nut on gun issues, but he was serious.
I would hope the NRA would agree that citizen ownership of atomic weapons should be illegal.
But this bunch makes me wonder.
And, for those who will react to this, I own three guns. I haven't fired one in years, but I still have them. (None of them are nuclear).

Normally I agree with you too. However your trying to suggest that the NRA and the US of F shouldn't have any say about which candidates they will support. Not only do I believe they do but I believe they have every right to decide who they will or will not endorse.

Further the NRA is not a "Right Wing Group" They are a 2nd amendment group and you obviously know very little about them. The NRA has actually supported legislation that keeps guns out of the hands of criminals. Instant background check was thier idea, ballistics marking of firing pins was thier idea. The NRA has never been against legislation that keeps guns out of the hands of criminals or nuts. They are however against legislation that keeps guns out of the hands of the law abiding. If your a law abiding citizen why do you need restrictions, why do you need permits etc etc. The NRA is not unreasonable. The point of the NRA is every law, every restriction, is one more step away from our constitutional right that is not supposed to be infringed upon. AT what point does it finally stop eroding before it dissapears altogether ??? AT what point do you become satisfied with the gun laws and not want more ??

Now getting to police and sheriff's organizations, this story is NOT saying they intend to speak in place of the police or sheriffs associations, it is saying they will speak against the ones who seek to enact laws "against" the constitution. ie.. stand your ground, or whatever laws may be the issue at the time. We have to be VERY CAREFULL how much power we give police. As it stands now they are already running around hopped on steroids, armed with automatic weapons, armored vehicles, body armor, serving no knock warrants, shooting innocents and pets with impunity, beating protestors with clubs, smashing cellphones, smashing cars in high speed chases, etc etc. How much worse do you want it to get ? Just how much more power do you think they need to have without having to answer up to the citizens? The NRA-ILA has worked very hard in conjunction with Law Enforcement to craft legislation that is reasonable for the law abiding, and good for the cops as well.

This is NOT partisan BS, the 2nd, just like the 1st is a right that belongs to all of us, not just the right or left.